School Monitoring Tools

Below is a list of school related monitoring tools linked to our Governor Priorities. This is not an exhaustive list and will be updated as new tools and examples are highlighted in project proposals and reports.

Student Engagement Monitoring Tools

1) Behaviour/Attendance LogsDescription: Schools will log behaviour incidences and non-attendance on their school information management system. This is one of the primary measurement tools for engagement. However it should be noted that while there is often a correlation between poor behaviour and poor attendance, there may be some students where attendance is due to practical considerations (e.g. they are a young carer).Pros: Minimal cost and effort in reproducing this information and high accuracy. Cons: These measurements are not appropriate in every case for re-engagement. For some students, lack of confidence may be the primary issue rather than behaviour.

2) Teacher AssessmentDescription: This tool requests qualitative feedback from pupils’ main teacher as to whether the pupil is showing more engagement in class and whether they view that this can be partly attributed to the initiative in question. This is the other primary measurement tool for engagement.Pros: Low cost and relatively straightforward to administer. Teachers are well placed to make this assessment.Cons: There is an additional time/admin burden in collating this feedback. There is no systematic scale so makes it difficult to aggregate impact or show distance travelled.

3) Confidence/Improved Attitude to Learning Questionnaire/SurveyDescription: These can be standard, validated surveys that can be carried out at the start and end of an intervention (and mid-way point if appropriate). Examples:

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale - well established, free to use 1 page questionnaire which can be used to assess self-esteem for secondary school pupils

Pupils Attitudes to Self and School - paid for online survey which can be used for primary and secondary school pupils (tends to be used on a school wide basis rather than single projects)

Pros: Externally validated so can compare results against ‘standard’ results to identify if pupils are below normal expectations. Existing guidance on how to administer surveys.Cons: Takes time to administer and collate surveys. Can be a financial cost implication.

Student Resilience and Well-being Monitoring Tools

1) Teacher AssessmentDescription: This tool requests qualitative feedback from pupils’ main teacher as to the state of the pupil’s resilience and well-being.Pros: Low cost and relatively straightforward to administer. Cons: There is an additional time/admin burden in collating this feedback. Teachers may be able to make some judgements about the mental wellbeing of a pupil but they are often not specifically trained in this area. Additionally without feedback from pupils concerned, this gives a very limited picture on their wellbeing.

2) Questionnaire/Survey Description: These can be standard, validated surveys that can be carried out at the start and end of an intervention (and mid-way point if appropriate). Public Health England have produced a very useful toolkit for schools and colleges - ﻿Measuring and monitoring children and young people's wellbeing ﻿which includes a number of examplesExamples:

General Self-Efficacy Scale - well established short questionnaire to assess perceived self-efficacy with the aim to predict coping with daily hassles (suitable for secondary school pupils and above)

Pros: Externally validated so can compare results against ‘standard’ results to identify if pupils are below normal expectations. Existing guidance on how to administer surveys. Process can bring to light previously hidden issues or struggles.Cons: Takes time to administer and collate surveys.

Literacy/Numeracy Monitoring Tools

1) Academic progress within schoolDescription: Schools own monitoring assessment of student’s progress – in primary schools, this progress is measured within each year group, generally on a below expectation-at expectation-better than expectation scale. Pros: Minimal cost and effort in reproducing this information and high accuracy. This is the standard tool we would use and not expect additional academic information unless there were compelling operational reasons.Cons: With the abolition of standardised sub-levels, it is now very difficult to compare results across schools (e.g. some schools may have 3 levels others may have 5). Also it is more difficult to monitor distance travelled. For example, a very poorly performing student may significantly improve over the course of a year but as he/she was coming from a very low base, may well still be assessed as below expectation and so none of the improvements would show up on the report

2) External Standardised TestsDescription: These are tests that provide nationally benchmarked standardised and age-standardised scores. They typically involve a test at the start of the year and end of the year. Examples:

Pros: Effective at showing ‘distance travelled’ and provide ability to easily compare across schools.Cons: High financial and administrative cost. Additional tests required for pupils which may make engagement with pupils difficult (particularly at the beginning of the intervention).

Enrichment Monitoring Tools

1) Teacher AssessmentDescription: This tool requests qualitative feedback from pupils’ main teacher as to whether the pupil is showing improved confidence (or other relevant social skills such as teamwork) in class and whether they view that this can be partly attributed to the initiative in question. This is the primary measurement tool for enrichment.Pros: Low cost and relatively straightforward to administer. Teachers are well placed to make this assessment.Cons: There is an additional time/admin burden in collating this feedback. There is no systematic scale so makes it difficult to aggregate impact or show distance travelled.

Parental Engagement Monitoring Tools

1) Teacher AssessmentDescription: This tool requests qualitative feedback from pupils’ main teacher as to how engaged they consider the parent to be in their child’s school education. This would primarily be through interactions at parents evenings and school communications (e.g. reading records).Pros: Low cost and relatively straightforward to administer. Cons: Teachers may be able to give some indication of parental engagement (e.g. attendance at parents’ evenings, signing reading record/homework diary). However they are unlikely to have significant insight into how the parent supports the child’s education outside of school.

2) Project Specific Survey/QuestionnaireDescription: At present we have not found any validated tools/surveys that specifically measure parents’ engagement in their child’s primary or secondary education. There are resources linked to general family support, particularly early years (TOPSE, Parenting Stress Index and Outcome Star – Family) which have elements on education but only in the context of wider family support. Consequently any surveys/questionnaires used are created by the project/school themselves.Pros: Minimal financial cost (excluding staff time). Bespoke survey so will answer questions specific to the school/project. Enables school to gather information from parents and teachers and amalgamate for monitoring purposesCons: Takes time to design survey and getting survey responses back (particularly from parents). Unique to each school/project so makes comparison across projects difficult. Relies on self-assessment by parents who may overrate their engagement in order to impress the school.

The Walcot & Hayle's Trustee is a limited company (6133849) registered in England and is the sole trustee of The Walcot Educational Foundation (312800), The Hayle's Charity (312800-1), The Walcot Non Educational Charity (312800-2) and the Cynthia Mosley Memorial Fund (312800-3)